throwaway217384

Clarification: Half the developers salaries are more than the managing partners salaries today,when I started most the developers were making half of what the MP's salaries were.

If you were one of them... wait, I know you'd never be one of them because you come off as a smarter ape, investigative, not ignorant, not naive, not timid, capable of caring for yourself. You'd have been gone before I got there.

If you'd like I could just as easily justified by rationalizing why they deserve what they were getting paid... because that's what they were getting paid. Their backgrounds/education wasn't very strong and (at least one of them) had poor judgement and reasoning skills (I mean look what he was accepting for pay!).

ADD: The one I probably wouldn't have ever hired in the first place, but he was there before, knew a fare amount of the current situation, and unfortunately got hired because his mom new one of the managing partners. The managing partners were also somewhat clueless to what they were wrongly paying...

It seems many people on HN prefer rocky revolutions over stable progressive improvements and reform.

You might be right. I suppose I did what I did for some what selfish reasons. I should have just shut my yapper and let the timid and ignorant coworkers continue on or I should have told them, caused serious issues with the company I was just hired at and job back into the job search in a town with some but limited opportunities.

One of the gentlemen ended up leaving with in a year. I had been asking him to fill out a self performance assessment so I could get him a hefty raise. The other guy is quite timid, somewhat immature, and socially inept... I suppose he was getting paid what he and his personality deserves. No?

Or I could have gone about righting the ship rather than throwing all the weight on one side and sinking it... causing not only the two underpaid guys to lose their jobs but also the rest of the dozen employees. Which would be the more appropriate move in your opinion?

Probably depends on your jurisdiction. Some might say you're breaking your contract in doing so.

I wonder if you could get in trouble by disclosing that "I'm paid approximately between $25 and $30 per hour."

Interesting question.

I think many, men and women, are still biased against women because they believe they are catty and dramatic or are afraid of increased legal issues (lawsuits). These are obviously not reality either and it too sucks.

A few more things:

Half the developers salaries are more than the managing partners salaries (although the managing partners get a bonus which then makes their annual income higher than anyone else in the company so long as the company does well).

When I tell the employees not to discuss salary I offer them a few things to say in case another coworker asks them. My first go to reply is "I consider my salary and finances to be private matters that I don't tend to share with others." or "We're coworkers, what good could possibly come from us talking about this? The only outcome is someone, you, me, or [boss/company] will be upset. Do we want to add drama and tension to our relationships?"

I believe this sometimes happens because women are less likely to counter-offer and negotiate during the hiring process. It sucks.

I work for a smaller software company (~25 employees) and basically manage all things IT (internal business IT and software development). I'm responsible for the IT budget, our software developer salaries are the single largest company "expense".

When I started several years ago it came to my attention that the existing developers and IT staff were drastically underpaid (there was one other internal developer, an internal IT guy, myself, and a few outside contractors). I brought it to the attention of my bosses (managing partners) and have made it my goal to bring other developers salaries up to par. When I was hired I was making almost double what the other two were. I realized one of the biggest risks to the company was if either one of them decided to look across the street and find they could probably get a 40% raise on the spot. If they left a lot of knowledge and investment would walk out the door.

Over that past few years we've weened ourselves off the contractors/consultants and have hired internally. We are now at ~8 developers. In order to hire the more recent developers we've had to offer market rate salaries. During reviews and hiring I've always told employees not to discuss their salary, mostly for psychological reasons. No matter what someone will feel bad. "What if you make more than them? They might not think you're worth more than them. Causing tension and friction. What if they make more that you? Same thing."

I know that some have discussed it salary with others. At times it ticks me off.. makes me want to ensure they aren't lying by reducing their or withholding their next raise. (Please note that's a immediate gut reaction and I throw it out the window) quickly.

I'm happy to report, after much effort, I've been able to show the managing partners again this year that some developers still need larger than COLA raises (some should get 20%, 15%, 10% and most 5%). They are weary but I think they finally understand the importance of this. We do reviews and raises in a few months, and when I sit down with them I will still insist on not talking about salary or raise (amount/percent) and use the same explanation as before.

Yes, no one wants to be taken advantage of and the easiest way we think about doing that is salary transparency. That would work great in a world were psychology and subjectiveness didn't exist. I tend to be a very logical, analytical, rational personal. And as much as I hate office politics, emotions getting in the way, and having to hack psychology, they exist and as the logical, analytical, and rational person I think I am those things must be factored into going about things.